There wasn't any flailing in that thread, but it gave me pause. I really wasn't sure what the poster wanted. If they'd tacked on "What's the most outrageous rudeness you've ever seen at work?" or "In retrospect, how should I have handled it?" then it might have been moved to Coffeebreak or stayed in All in a Day's Work, but we would have known what the OP wanted.

I've also noticed that when I first discovered Ehell, there were lots of stories about etiquette or rudeness. General stories in the Life folder, work stories in the Work folder, etc. Now it seems every story must have a question.

I, too, find it both funny and annoying when the question seems tacked on. Like if someone post "A big creepy guy kicked my grandma and shot my dog. I yelled at him and used curse words. Was I rude?"

If you "not sure what they need from you" then simply move on to another thread. Perhaps it's simply a topic you don't have firsthand experience with or an opinion on, or one you simply feel isn't important enough - I often find that to be the case, and I just don't participate in those threads.

I personally find it distracting when posters derail a thread by questioning whether it should have been posted in the first place! If I see a topic that seems inappropriate I report it and move on. If the mods think its fine they'll let it stay open and it can continue without me interrupting. If not, they'll deal with the problem.

So in the office sub-forum, I saw a thread, no questions were asked, it was someone relaying a negative experience in the office. No "how do i respond?" or "This person was rude, and I didn't handle it well. How could I handle this better next time?"

I agreed that the person was rude and asked simply is there an etiquette question? I was told "Agreed. There doesn't need to be an etiquette question. E-Hell is founded on the concept of relaying rude circumstances."

Now, i am confused, and sincerely from my heart I am asking for clarification & help to understand. Where is the line? Honestly, if people are coming here to vent their frustrations when there are vast numbers of forums better suited for counseling (& esp career advice).... well, I don't know how to react to that. Is it a true statement that "there doesn't need to be an etiquette question" and "relaying rude circumstances" is sufficient to post... ?

Truth be told, I am changing in that my very first post here relayed rude circumstances & I don't think I asked an etiquette question. The post is gone now, when I click "view posts" it is too old I guess. If I could go back in time knowing what I know now, I would have asked questions... "how to respond?" and so forth. That fact makes me think that some newcomers love to jump in but haven't formulated their expectations as to what they truly want from ehell so the first several posts may be rambling & venting. Less about etiquette, more justifying their feelings. I am guilty of this like I mentioned.

Speaking of rambling, sorry, I didn't mean to. I guess this means a lot to me. Bottom line question: Is it true there doesn't need to be an etiquette question per se? Relaying a historical story to prove how rude a person is is sufficient? If the answer is 'yes' is there a line?

So in the office sub-forum, I saw a thread, no questions were asked, it was someone relaying a negative experience in the office. No "how do i respond?" or "This person was rude, and I didn't handle it well. How could I handle this better next time?"

I agreed that the person was rude and asked simply is there an etiquette question? I was told "Agreed. There doesn't need to be an etiquette question. E-Hell is founded on the concept of relaying rude circumstances."

Now, i am confused, and sincerely from my heart I am asking for clarification & help to understand. Where is the line? Honestly, if people are coming here to vent their frustrations when there are vast numbers of forums better suited for counseling (& esp career advice).... well, I don't know how to react to that. Is it a true statement that "there doesn't need to be an etiquette question" and "relaying rude circumstances" is sufficient to post... ?

Truth be told, I am changing in that my very first post here relayed rude circumstances & I don't think I asked an etiquette question. The post is gone now, when I click "view posts" it is too old I guess. If I could go back in time knowing what I know now, I would have asked questions... "how to respond?" and so forth. That fact makes me think that some newcomers love to jump in but haven't formulated their expectations as to what they truly want from ehell so the first several posts may be rambling & venting. Less about etiquette, more justifying their feelings. I am guilty of this like I mentioned.

Speaking of rambling, sorry, I didn't mean to. I guess this means a lot to me. Bottom line question: Is it true there doesn't need to be an etiquette question per se? Relaying a historical story to prove how rude a person is is sufficient? If the answer is 'yes' is there a line?

Unless things have changed, then I am under the impression that we are allowed to post stories without a question; the purpose of such a post would be to generate general discussion.

Thank you SO MUCH! Same to you rose red, see, I've been operating under the same mindset as you two considering the issue has been brought up before and in the back of my mind I knew that telling stories to generation discussion had been deemed fine, I just didn't have the source handy. Like rose red, I remember the same time with the same happenings.

I understand your point, but that's subjective - the answer to a lot of "real" questions seems obvious to me too. But not everybody will agree and that's the whole point of a discussion forum.

No, not really subjective at all. The answer to the example given by giggity and similar posts is very obvious. I think most of us are aware of the purpose/point of a discussion forum. But ehall is an etiquette forum, and masking a search for validation (or therapy) with a so-called etiquettte question isn't the purpose of the forum, as I understand it.

It's honestly not my intention to backseat moderate, but I think these issues can be easily resolved through two very simple methods: Scritzy's Coke Rule in the rules thread, when a poster irritated or annoys you. Or using the Report button. Should help those out that don't think a thread is in the correct spot or is venty/looking for validation.

It's honestly not my intention to backseat moderate, but I think these issues can be easily resolved through two very simple methods: Scritzy's Coke Rule in the rules thread, when a poster irritated or annoys you. Or using the Report button. Should help those out that don't think a thread is in the correct spot or is venty/looking for validation.

Gotta go with this myself. I've not ever seen the mods complain that people are reporting too much, and/or reporting stuff they shouldn't. It's almost always the opposite--we can't be everywhere at once, you guys need to tell us if you see something fishy. So, barring further official pronouncements, I would suggest people hit the report button on venty/validation posts, and see if that results in an overall reduction.

Actually, I'd like a mod to weigh in here on that. Can we report too much?

Because, in the past, there have been (from my understanding) cases where people have been gagged for a period of time because they've reported "one too many times" and are now seen as troublemakers. Granted, the stories of that I heard about are quite a while ago, but is it possible to overreport?

If "just report it to a mod" was the solution to everything, this thread would not be open for discussion.

What do you believe would be the solution other than the procedures that the moderators have laid out in plain print? I am not really seeing a rash of anything untoward that is requiring anything else or drastic change, but this is purely my opinion.